Yeah, there are some unqualified people out there, but I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of job seekers in STEM can't be "re-trained" in similar sub fields of STEM. For example, why can't someone who has solid SQL knowledge be trained as a DBA or a Java programmer?

There was an interview with one of the people picketing McDonalds for hgher pay. The interviewer asked if McDonalds offered her a supervisory role. She said she didn't want that responsibility, just wanted the money that came along with it.

I would agree with this assessment. It works if the sample you're looking at is big enough, and you're not looking to cut 10% or some non-trivial percentage.

I get what you are saying, but it basically forces you to reluctantly collaborate, not collaborate because it is a Good Thing (tm). It's like the taxes you pay aren't charity in the strictest sense of the word.

I think you hit a good issue that has to be addressed. I think you need to be able to determine when there is a dip and take it on a case by case basis. Your divorce example is a good one. I think IF management knew that you may have a month or two off, they actually have the context and could give you the support you needed BEFORE any problems occur.

Stack Ranking only works on a short term basis where you want to trim the fat.

If you do it for too long, two things happen (a) you start cutting into good performers (b) people will not collaborate to make others look good

As the old sayings go, if you want more of something, subsidize it. If you want less of something, tax it.

I had been advocating for this type of change for awhile.

I would make H1-B's more expensive, especially with high unemployment.

Also, I would place minimum salary requirements on those with H1B's. If they were people with skills that are in such demand, the employer should have no problem paying a high salary, no?

It is hypocrisy of the highest order.

If Bill or Microsoft had suck a problem with the people out there not being qualified, how come they don't spend a Billion dollars or something themselves to train people. Microsoft could easily hire on new graduates or people who want to retrain and invest in their training. I would think this would be some sort of competitive advantage.

Hey Bill, How about you actually hire and train people yourselves, or work with High Schools/Colleges to actually have some sort of apprenticeship/internship programs? We have/had high unemployment and low labor force participation. You can't tell me that we can't retrain exsisting people now and not have to bring more people in.

I did say "price increases" were an option. Profits may not cover all the upgrades, but if you were to raise prices $5/year or something, that's better than large one-off increases.

In other words, ISP's have not invested profits (or small price increases) back into their networks to keep ahead of the tidal wave. Wouldn't it make sense to do incremental updates over the span of several years?

As I said, I never held a job title of "Linux Admin," even though I have acquired some of the skills needed of an Linux Admin elsewhere. Let us look at it another way, if I applied to a job that "required" more experience than this one, I would expect to be summarily rejected for not having enough experience. So which is it, I have too much or too little?

Secondly, the job advert said the company offered great career growth potential. Pay would not be an issue, which the numbers prove. So the "overqualification" I may appear to have could be rendered moot.

There is some expectation that there will be some training when students get out as Universities can't teach everything. Students will generally have a good breadth of knowledge, maybe not the required depth.

It would seem that if there was significant growth in the "IT Sector," that anyone who was mildly qualified would be able to switch jobs easy. As my own anecdotal evidence suggests, it still isn't easy.